What Would a Patripassian Gospel Look Like?

[davidbrainerd]

Tertullian uses "the son of man" in Luke as proof of Jesus' true human-ness and birth, showing this bastardized phrase not found in Daniel was created for that anti-marcionite purpose.

How do we know that this was all Tertullian was doing. It is odd the lengths to which Tertullian makes reference to passages from the Jewish writings. If I am having a discussion about any subject with anyone it only makes sense that I make reference to things we share in common. If I am discussion food with a vegetarian bringing up the wonders of a steakhouse serves no real purpose. There isn't much to discuss. So the virtues of a vagina and large breasts to a homosexual male. Generally speaking dialogues if they are to have any value make reference to commonalities not things which have no relevance or are absolutely unknown commodities.

Marcion was dead for 60 years already. Tert is not discussing with him but with his fellow Catholic clergy on the virtues of using Lk over Mcn. One of them being "son of man" in Lk proves Jesus to be human.

[Secret Alias]

You can clamor about lack of evidence all you like but every theory you put forth is total conspiracy theory. To you, Irenaeus wrote every early patristic text, edited the gospels, changed Marcion into Justin and Justin into Marcion.

I think that you need to demonstrate at least some ancient witness for your reconstruction of Marcionism. Of what value can there possibly be in pretending that an early Christian community had a canon with no references to the Jewish writings when there is no evidence for such a community? You might as well argue that they venerated kangaroos.

[Secret Alias]

Tert is not discussing with him but with his fellow Catholic clergy on the virtues of using Lk over Mcn.

Really is that what Tertullian was doing? But Marcion is referenced over and over again in the text of Book 4 and 5 as if he there and the author addressing him.

[Secret Alias]

The closing words of Book 4 "Marcion, I pity you; your labour has been in vain. For the Jesus Christ who appears in your Gospel is mine." Earlier in the book too "Well now, Marcion, and all ye who are companions in misery, and associates in hatred with that heretic, what will you dare say to this?" [Adv Marc 4.36.3] Also " Now tell me, Marcion, what is your opinion of the apostle's language, when he says, "Let no man judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath, which is a shadow of things to come, but the body is of Christ?" [Adv Marc 5.19.9] "But I will let Marcion know that the principle term of his creed comes from the school of Epicurus, implying that the Lord is stupid and indifferent;889 wherefore he refuses to say that He is an object to be feared. " [Adv Marc 5.19.7] " Pray tell me, Marcion, does your god build up the authority of his law on the work of the Creator?" [Adv Marc 5.18.8]

[davidbrainerd]

You can clamor about lack of evidence all you like but every theory you put forth is total conspiracy theory. To you, Irenaeus wrote every early patristic text, edited the gospels, changed Marcion into Justin and Justin into Marcion.

I think that you need to demonstrate at least some ancient witness for your reconstruction of Marcionism. Of what value can there possibly be in pretending that an early Christian community had a canon with no references to the Jewish writings when there is no evidence for such a community? You might as well argue that they venerated kangaroos.

Per Tertullian that part is handled by the Antithesis arguing against the OT god that he is inconsistant etc.

The closing words of Book 4 "Marcion, I pity you; your labour has been in vain. For the Jesus Christ who appears in your Gospel is mine."

And?

[davidbrainerd]

Tert is not discussing with him but with his fellow Catholic clergy on the virtues of using Lk over Mcn.

Really is that what Tertullian was doing? But Marcion is referenced over and over again in the text of Book 4 and 5 as if he there and the author addressing him.

Addressing a dead heresiarch rather than his living followers or admirers is a rhetorical device. And...When Paul says "o death where is your sting" was his letter written to the grim reaper?

[Secret Alias]

Per Tertullian that part is handled by the Antithesis arguing against the OT god that he is inconsistant etc

.

That's one interpretation. It's not certain what the 'Antitheses' were and how they related to the Marcionite canon or Marcion. You race toward conclusions when there simply is a lot of ambiguity. Certainty is a sign of low intelligence.

[Secret Alias]

And?

You simply assume that Tertullian was having a conversation with or writing leaders of the various churches. It doesn't make sense. Who was he going to send a five volume work of this sort that even the final editor admits was circulating in at least two different earlier forms before the final publication of Adversus Marcionem. A five volume work was meant for a library and only a library.

[Secret Alias]

Addressing a dead heresiarch rather than his living followers or admirers is a rhetorical device

Maybe or it could have been added to Justin's commentary to make it appear as if it was directed at Marcion and then retained when Tertullian further augmented the material. It's odd the directness with which Tertullian a third century Christian engages Marcion a heretic from a hundred years earlier. The same thing happens in Origen's Contra Celsum. It's peculiar.

[davidbrainerd]

And?

You simply assume that Tertullian was having a conversation with or writing leaders of the various churches. It doesn't make sense. Who was he going to send a five volume work of this sort that even the final editor admits was circulating in at least two different earlier forms before the final publication of Adversus Marcionem. A five volume work was meant for a library and only a library.

Who would be more likely to visit this library? Marcion who was dead and according to the Marcionites already in heaven sitting on Jesus' left hand? Or Catholic theologians who were still alive?